Author Topic: Upgrading Nikon D200 (Read 15229 times)

Phadrea · « **on:** March 25, 2013, 07:40 »

I have had my Nikon D200 for a few years and feel I have outgrown it. I would like to either upgrade to a better body that can use the same lenses (kit lens and telephoto) but with full frame and better quality. Or should I just get a very good lens for the D200 ? I am out of touch with what is out there so would be grateful for any pointers. I have been too long away from shooting editorial images (since college in 1989) which I had a niche. I like to get nice saturation close to transparency quality. HD video would be a nice added feature so I can also shoot stock video.

Another thing is I use Raw shooter essentials to render my Raw images and whatever format I save the edited images to a JPEG (Adobe RBG 1998, Pro) I never seem to get the same nice result as my Raw Shooter edit on the screen. They seem more washed out, less saturated versions. Perhaps some decent software also you could recommend for getting the best images from Raw.

Thanks folks.

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #1 on:** March 25, 2013, 07:45 »

Any current DSLR from any manufacturer is going to give you much better results than the D200, even the cheap ones. Managing noise is so much better nowadays, you'll be amazed I think.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #2 on:** March 25, 2013, 08:16 »

you may find your lenses wont work at full frame if they are DX.

Phadrea · « **Reply #3 on:** March 25, 2013, 08:19 »

That's the trouble, I was hoping to avoid buying all again from scratch because of the expense. I could sell it all I suppose but I wouldn't get anywhere near the amount I paid in 2006. I do like the idea of buying an slr that takes hd video.

shotupdave · « **Reply #4 on:** March 25, 2013, 08:28 »

Just like all technology, the price of digital cameras fall dramatically. I gave my D100 away since it was all but worthless. You can find a decent D90 or D7000 for not that much money and notice that the colors and noise are much better than the D200.

If you do not want to sell the D200, consider converting it to a infra-red camera

Gel-O Shooter · « **Reply #5 on:** March 25, 2013, 10:11 »

I just upgraded my D200 to a D800. If all you have are DX lenses, be prepared to drop another couple thousand on some decent full frame lenses. I have found that photos taken with my old DX lenses on a D800 body look like crap. Also be prepared to upgrade your computer equipment. Those files are HUGE and it seemed like they filled up my 500G harddrive in about 24 hours.

I got an external 1T harddrive, and that helped.
I like my D800, but if I had it to do over again, I would probably settle for the cheaper D7000 and get a really good lens or two with the extra $$. It still has an excellent 16MP sensor, and it does HD movies. Your DX lenses will work fine on it too.
Hope this helps.

Phadrea · « **Reply #6 on:** March 25, 2013, 11:39 »

Thanks. Will I notice a massive jump in quality from the D200 to the above examples you mentioned, or just a little ?

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #7 on:** March 25, 2013, 11:42 »

Massive jump I think. I went D70 - D300 - D700 - D800 and each time there's a big shift upwards in quality of image.

Phadrea · « **Reply #8 on:** March 25, 2013, 11:52 »

But surely if the camera is good enough in the beginning and the lenses are good what are you really getting for a few hundred more? Isn't it the image making that is key ? The D800 is shockingly expensive but I am attracted to having HD video good enough for stock. Of course I will need a new PC as well as it's 9 years old and struggling. I read a lot of poor reviews regarding the D7000's poor auto focus where you just can't get sharp images.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #9 on:** March 25, 2013, 11:54 »

Quote from: Gel-O Shooter on March 25, 2013, 10:11

I just upgraded my D200 to a D800. If all you have are DX lenses, be prepared to drop another couple thousand on some decent full frame lenses. I have found that photos taken with my old DX lenses on a D800 body look like crap. Also be prepared to upgrade your computer equipment. Those files are HUGE and it seemed like they filled up my 500G harddrive in about 24 hours. I got an external 1T harddrive, and that helped.
I like my D800, but if I had it to do over again, I would probably settle for the cheaper D7000 and get a really good lens or two with the extra $$. It still has an excellent 16MP sensor, and it does HD movies. Your DX lenses will work fine on it too.
Hope this helps.

I went the D7000 route. Many of my newer lenses were good quality DX and ... I found that the D7000 can be programmed to accept some of my really old lenses from Film days. The D7000 produces quality work (I think) and has convinced me to stick with the DX sensor and continue working with my current collection of lenses.

But, during an indecisive moment, I did try the Canon T2i. Another DX camera that I really like but will require a major expenditure in new lenses.

JPSDK · « **Reply #10 on:** March 25, 2013, 12:26 »

The d 200 is a good camera, and pictures done at iso 100 are still very competitive.
I bought a d 200 in 2006, upgraded in 2012 to another d 200, since I didnt find the improvement of file quality worth the money.
But then the d 600 came out and I bought one of those.
Yes, it is better. Better dynamic range performance, especially the light tones and much larger files.
Then the full frame/ lens problem. It proved that many of my lenses worked on full frame, that was a relief.
Of course I also found out that my computer suddently became slower at image processing and storage shrinked.

So advice to you would be...
consider if its worth the money, can it earn back?
and if you think about lenses, make sure not to buy dx lenses. The dx days are over.

Gel-O Shooter · « **Reply #11 on:** March 25, 2013, 13:15 »

Quote from: Herg on March 25, 2013, 11:39

Thanks. Will I notice a massive jump in quality from the D200 to the above examples you mentioned, or just a little ?

Well, the files are certainly more massive. The image quality is better, but I don't know about massively better. The one thing I was disappointed in was the noise level in low light. I really don't think the D800 is tremendously better with noise than my old D200 was. But then again the huge pixel count might just make the noise level more noticeable? You really can't go on my experience so much as I am just now in the process of upgrading my lenses to full frame. Bear in mind that most of my DX lenses were pretty old. I was anticipating upgrading to full frame for a couple of years and haven't bought any of the newer DX lenses.
I can tell you that the D800 plus my 50mm 1.8 prime produces a very good photo. If you do a lot of cropping, you will love the D800 and those huge files.

disorderly · « **Reply #12 on:** March 25, 2013, 13:39 »

I upgraded D70 -> D200 -> D300 -> D800. My images got dramatically better when I moved to the D300, even though many of the reviews said I wouldn't see much of a difference. The move to the D800 has been even more dramatic, and not just because it's better in low light and has so much more resolution. Even looking at a 100% view I can see a huge improvement in detail and contrast.

It helps that I've been upgrading my lenses since my D200 days. More F/2.8 lenses, more FX lenses, and of course much higher cost. But the results are amazing, so I'm okay with the expense.

JPSDK · « **Reply #13 on:** March 25, 2013, 16:11 »

Still, it is not about your camera and lenses.
It is about your eye and imagination.

A brilliant mind with a d 200 can produce pictures that can outsell any of those fancy upcomlings with ever so many lenses and megapixels.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #14 on:** March 25, 2013, 17:32 »

"A brilliant mind with a d 200 can produce pictures that can outsell any of those fancy upcomlings with ever so many lenses and megapixels."

Yep but could sell even more with a fancy camera

. Its about both surely no matter how brilliant you are you can't take pictures without a camera!

Mantis · « **Reply #15 on:** March 25, 2013, 19:00 »

Quote from: disorderly on March 25, 2013, 13:39

I upgraded D70 -> D200 -> D300 -> D800. My images got dramatically better when I moved to the D300, even though many of the reviews said I wouldn't see much of a difference. The move to the D800 has been even more dramatic, and not just because it's better in low light and has so much more resolution. Even looking at a 100% view I can see a huge improvement in detail and cotrast.

It helps that I've been upgrading my lenses since my D200 days. More F/2.8 lenses, more FX lenses, and of course much higher cost. But the results are amazing, so I'm okay with the expense.

I bought two D800's and scrapped them. Very high noise level in virtually all shadow areas, crunch at 100% and focus soft. Downsizing helped but then why pay for all the MP's if you have to downsize? Maybe I got duds because both of mine has the left focus point issue where auto focus said it was sharp when it wasn't. Focusing manually, the results simply were not impressive.

gillian vann · « **Reply #16 on:** March 25, 2013, 19:40 »

AFAIK all your DX lenses will fit, but you will be shooting in cropped mode. but isn't that like putting cheap sneakers on an athlete?

tab62 · « **Reply #17 on:** March 25, 2013, 21:28 »

I jumped from a rebel T1 to the 1D Mark IV - non of my lenses transferred but worth the jump. I just bought one lens at a time (24-70 F/2.8 being my first choice) as I could afford them.

Pixart · « **Reply #18 on:** March 26, 2013, 08:55 »

The D7100 has just been released and it is supposed to be wonderful at high iso. Scott Kelby gave it quite a good review.

I believe the D7000 is being discontinued isn't it?

I went from d200-d7000 and the d7000 felt like a toy in my hands, but it is far more responsive - esp taking shots of flying dancers or sports. When shooting a dancer in a jump I would miss more shots than I'd get with the D200 and with the D7000 I would get almost all of the shots. And quite honestly, no matter what they say about camera vs photographer - the newer cameras take better looking photos. More detail in the dark zones, better contrast, greater dynamic range. And using the same lenses, the D200 spends more time hunting for focus which equals losing more shots.

Quote

Still, it is not about your camera and lenses.
It is about your eye and imagination.

A brilliant mind with a d 200 can produce pictures that can outsell any of those fancy upcomlings with ever so many lenses and megapixels.

Sure, to a point...but I have 2.8 lenses and I have 5.6 lenses and the difference in quality is vast. Rarely see fringing on the good glass. Can't shoot a subject like deer with the cheap lenses - they come out of the trees at dusk and the shots are useless for the most part with cheap glass. Really tough shooting sports and moving subjects (like toddlers/birds) with the slow glass.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 26, 2013, 09:06 »

Not sure if the 7000 will be discontinued for a while - theres a very big price gap

mtkang · « **Reply #20 on:** March 26, 2013, 09:44 »

may consider a nikon soon.. i had read some good review of d7000, but how is it comparing to a more expensive model like d800?

and you guys mention something like DX lense.. so there are old digital lense can't use on new body?

I got a few nikon manual lense, any of this new machine had able to shoot with it?

brm1949 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 26, 2013, 12:01 »

The Nikon D7000 will work with Nikon manual AIS lenses.

gillian vann · « **Reply #22 on:** March 26, 2013, 20:39 »

Quote from: mtkang on March 26, 2013, 09:44

may consider a nikon soon.. i had read some good review of d7000, but how is it comparing to a more expensive model like d800?

and you guys mention something like DX lense.. so there are old digital lense can't use on new body?

nope, DX is the cropped sensor size. they still attach and work, but the camera adjusts and effectively you get that 'cropped' view.
Nikon film camera lenses (all full frame) still work on DSLR bodies, barring one or two oldies. (it was Canon who changed their mount, not Nikon

)

mtkang · « **Reply #23 on:** March 27, 2013, 00:15 »

what does the crop view mean? i thought there is only 'normal' sensor and 'full frame' sensor..

I saw D800 is almost like 3 times price of D7000.. any features that make it more valuable?

Quote from: gillian on March 26, 2013, 20:39

Quote from: mtkang on March 26, 2013, 09:44
may consider a nikon soon.. i had read some good review of d7000, but how is it comparing to a more expensive model like d800?

and you guys mention something like DX lense.. so there are old digital lense can't use on new body?

nope, DX is the cropped sensor size. they still attach and work, but the camera adjusts and effectively you get that 'cropped' view.
Nikon film camera lenses (all full frame) still work on DSLR bodies, barring one or two oldies. (it was Canon who changed their mount, not Nikon )

Sedge · « **Reply #24 on:** March 27, 2013, 01:33 »

Check out this thread over at dpreview:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/51125005

Download the model portraits from both cameras and look at them in Photoshop at 100 percent. Some amazing quality from both camera bodies (d7100 vs d800).

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Upgrading Nikon D200 (Read 15229 times)

Phadrea

fotoVoyager

Pauws99

Phadrea

shotupdave

Gel-O Shooter

Phadrea

fotoVoyager

Phadrea

WarrenPrice

JPSDK

Gel-O Shooter

disorderly

JPSDK

Pauws99

Mantis

gillian vann

tab62

Pixart

Pauws99

mtkang

brm1949

gillian vann

mtkang

Sedge

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors